Ooof.... not looking great for PC Plod. Yes he'd been drinking heavily, but - knocked to the ground, died shortly after from internal bleeding? Not good
Not looking good for plod at all. I wonder if they will actually charge anyone? Poss case for manslaughter?
interesting, how will the met get out of this?
interesting, how will the met get out of this?
dunno, but i bet they will, the slimy scumbags.
Meh, based on previous form they'll close ranks; one or two will be suspended on full pay and quietly shuffled off to a desk job.
The government will make a fuss, say that they're backing down on allowing the police all the powers under the sun, then wait a few months to quietly reintroduce rules that mean you can't photograph police, ask them why they're stopping you, etc etc
COP - "I told him to move on, he didn't listen. I gave him a push to encourage him to move forward. He was drunk. He fell over. Not my fault."
interesting that the 1st autopsy thought it has his heart disease that killed him
incompetence or conspiracy?
The Graun have already raised questions about the original autopsy, its indecent speed and leaking of infomration and the fact that it was carried out by someone who was already considered "a little discredited", also they were wqarned off from speaking to the fmaily, who have turned round and siad that the Met lied to them, so it does appear that there are quite a lot of coincidences, so no it couldn't be conspiracy as they obviously far, far too incompetent.
didn't the police said that they had not come into any contact with him? then they said that they had and had come under attack whilst tried to help him?
70 odd complaints of excessive force received by the IPCC yesterday.
Perhaps someone with some medical knowledge could comment on whether a shove and tumble like that is likely to cause abdominal haemorrhaging or just worsen something already kicking off.
Blair Peach. The man that died with the police radio shaped dint in his head. They got away with it then.
If they can shoot someone in the head for not speaking English and get away with it, shoving someone who dies later should be a doddle for them.
Nothing will change.
atlaz - no medical knowledge but I suppose what his existing condition is - for example if he has an aortic aneurysm an impact like that could rupture it I suppose, as could tripping and falling over a kerb or being in a car crash etc. Without the full facts it's hard to aportion blame correctly.
I assume from what I've heard about his history that he had a history of alcohol mis-use. Depends where the bleeding was, but it could be that he had a gastric bleed due largely to his previous medical history, a situation which may have been aggravated by his push, but also one which could have happened any time.
Let's not put two and two together and come up with the answer we all want, rather wait and try not to speculate on very little info.
anyone recall "battle of the beanfield"?
police state, incompetant coppers, rotten management (police chiefs)
its just another broken industry like the banking system
hey dudes, WE ARE ALL DOOMED ££$£$£$£$£$£
mt - MemberBlair Peach. The man that died with the police radio shaped dint in his head. They got away with it then.
That was a few years ago. I think post mortem investigations have moved on somewhat since 79.
The original postmortem was always suspect, carried out as it was, by a dodgy pathologist who announced hours after examining the body that the victim had very conveniently died of 'a heart attack'. The second one took a week to come to a conclusion, and I can't say that I'm surprised that the conclusion was in fact different.
But before everyone gets carried away and decides that [i]all[/i] coppers are 'slimy scumbags', it's perhaps worth considering the negative effect of that sort of attitude. The policing of the G20 protests was a bad day for the British police, and their creditability in the eyes of the public is now considerably lower.
But damning [i]all[/i] coppers will only increase the police's isolation from the communities which they are there to serve. And can also only increase the possibility of the police closing ranks and protecting 'their own'.
Yes uniformed thugs who attack members of the public who are exercising their lawful right to protest (and in the case of the G20 protesters, for noble and commendable causes) should not be tolerated. And the negative effect of such actions is clear to see. But the enemy is NOT the police. The 'enemy' are the politicians who cynically use the police to protect themselves from criticism. And probably the senior police officers who so willingly oblige.
The enemy is the protestors who decide to make a protest violent/riotous too. I agree with your comments though.
GG To me that resonates slightly with the whole "don't criticize our boys in Iraq, they're only doing their job you unpatriotic bastard" kind of stance.
Sure sure, all cops aren't evil but perhaps people are waking up to the fact that a hell of a lot of them are far from cuddly.
a lot of them are far from cuddly.
I, personally, wouldnt want cuddly cops.
Gus makes a reasonable point. When de Menezes was shot, there was a lot of attention placed on the officers who pulled the triggers when, to my mind, the ones who told them he was a dangerous man are the ones that need blaming.
Some senior officers are more than happy to sacrifice junior grades in order to avoid addressing the tougher questions and it's this attitude that probably guarantees mistakes will keep being made.
Grizzlygus, crikey with you both. Makes me angry people jump to conclusions from what the media portray which IS NOT the full facts. We as the public never know the full facts. Being a copper I can also see the difficulty for the police policing that protest, what a nightmare it must've been. I undergo the training to be able to police those demonstrations, get petrol bombed, fight with ridiculous amounts of kit on, run around with a shield .. would like to see some of you try it when you feel outnumbered and see what your reactions are anyway I'm not going to pass judgement or opinion on the G20 as I can see both sides and from my policing I certainly know the media are not potraying it in it's full light. he police cannot comment on procedure/tactics to allay any fears.
Do not judge all police from one incident that has not even come to a full investigation/conclusion.
To me that resonates slightly with the whole "don't criticize our boys in Iraq.........
Erm, yeah ............... and what's wrong with that ffs ? 😯
The politicians are responsible for the Iraqi war.
Or do you have another theory ? 😕
Do not judge all police from one incident that has not even come to a full investigation/conclusion
Would it have got past the 1st PM if the public/press hadn't jumped on it?
Yes 2nd PM would still have gone ahead.
Yes 2nd PM would still have gone ahead.
Why?
Blaming all plod would be wrong. But it obviously goes deeper than the odd "bad apple". Every time there is a dubious incident the METs immediate statements don't stand up to scrutiny, and some seem down right lies. We saw this with de Menezes and with Ian Tomlinson. In any normal investigation police only release information as fact when it can be proved to be so. If police rank and file don't speak out about this disinformation, then they are the enemy of a free and just society.
1st PM would be a normal home office pathologist, IPCC then come aboard o investigate and will automatically conduct their own PM with their own different pathologist.
Bit similar to a murder, 1st PM takes place and then defence have the opportunity to run another PM with their own pathologist if they wish.
If police rank and file don't speak out about this disinformation, then they are the enemy of a free and just society.
What, you expect ordinary coppers to publicly denounce statements issued by their senior officers.
You don't expect much from your average copper, do you ? 😯
But the IPCC wouldn't be involved if the press & public hadn't 'jumped to conclusions'
[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/16/police-delete-tourist-photos ]Welcome to the police state[/url]
Yeah I wouldn't be too quick to attack the media on this Munqe-chick. Just look at the Steven Lawrence case as an example of how important and useful intense media interest can be. We have today, a much better police service as a result of the media 'fuss' over Steven Lawrence's death.
One of the reasons why the British police service is undoubtedly one of the best, if not [i]the[/i] best, in the world, is precisely because of it's accountability.
.
The other reason is 'cause they is British 8)
Grizzlygus, best in the world. Maybe the SFO is, nowt else is.
Coffeeking, I'm with you. It's a shit state of affairs that decent folk have to undergo this sort of treatment from the police. But when there are elements intent on nothing but destruction, it's always going to happen.
Once real protesters start physically ejecting the violent element from within their own ranks during marches and handing them over to the police then they'll be able to exercise their legitimate right to peaceful protest. It's a real shame, but i can't seee it happening any other way.
and that of course is giving the police the benefit of the doubt on wether they just want to intimidate everyone out of their right to protest.
Who wants to bet that the only change that results from this is a ban on photographing the police?
Echoing GG, the more scrutiny the police come under, the better they will become. Accountability, from the lowest up to the highest, and an impartial application of the law to everyone, police or not will make an already decent service even better.
Conversely, closing ranks, being economical with the truth, blaming others for police shortcomings, and suggesting that the media shouldn't intervene all contribute to a poorer service, and will increase distrust and probably act to justify more violent protest.
I've encountered the TAG in the past, and watched what policemen without numbers got up to; not a glowing advert for any form of public service.
The Police cannot do the job without the trust and backing of the majority of the general public, and episodes like this one, particularly the amateur cack-handed way that the police have acted after the fact, go no small way to reducing that trust..
I am not blaming the media at all, what I'm saying is everyone is making their opinions and decisions based on the media, which as everyone know is never the FULL picture.
The IPCC would ALWAYS have become involved. No matter what may occur whenever there is a death either in Custody or within 24 hours of being "invovled"/meeting with police there will ALWAYS be an IPCC investigation. If I spoke to Joe Bloggs in the street and conducted a drugs search then 8 hours later he died of a heart attack, the IPCC would conduct an investigation due to police involvement, so IPCC involvement has nothing to do with media furore over his death.
I think your faith in the IPCC is stronger than mine.
The media are certainly guilty of extremely poor reporting on many, many things, but so often, that's all we have to go on. In this case, the intervention of the Guardian seems to have exposed a certain approach and made people sit up and take notice; this should have been done by the senior police officers involved on the day, as soon as it became apparent.
Transparency and openness will make for a better police force and will improve the arena in which they work...
Once real protesters start physically ejecting the violent element from within their own ranks during marches and handing them over to the police then they'll be able to exercise their legitimate right to peaceful protest.
So you don't deny that protesters are denied "their legitimate right to peaceful protest" ? 😯
A couple of points..... firstly it's not up to 'protesters' to make arrests. Secondly, in my experience people who turn up to demos looking for trouble [i]always[/i] wait for the police act out of order. They won't lob a bottle or smash a window when everything is peaceful, because they know very well that if they do so, the crowd will turn against them. The police invariably gives them the excuse to have the ruck which they always wanted. Otherwise they go home having done nothing.
Finally, one of the characteristics of a 'public demo' is that anyone can turn up. Organisers cannot vet who comes, and who doesn't (unlike the police who can vet every single one of their officers) So it is up to the police to deal with anyone who doesn't behave appropriately. After all, that is why protesters pay their taxes for.
BTW sq225917, have you seen the video, or were you at, the Climate Change Camp when it was 'cleared' by the police ? If so, you will have seen the police wade into a peaceful protest where the protesters had their hands in the air saying "this is not a riot" Didn't stop the police hitting them indiscriminately though.
I am not going to comment on my opinions of either the IPCC or the G20 protests and what happened it just concerns me how everyone hears a story from one perspective and they are so anti-police. I doesn't give me much hope for serving my force and trying to give the public the best service they desire and deserve when people are so anti.
And that is just how the IPCC gets involved the police inform them and they begin their investigation.
Oh well I love my job so I'll keep plugging away hoping to get things better.
The IPCC would ALWAYS have become involved. No matter what may occur whenever there is a death either in Custody or within 24 hours of being "invovled"/meeting with police there will ALWAYS be an IPCC investigation
You're missing the point
To all intents & purposes there was no [admitted] contact until the guy with the camcorder put his hand up
The only thing that the police said was that he died & that they tried to help him & were coming under sustained attack whilst doing this [a lie]
They claimed that prior to him being hit there was no previous contact [another lie]
You could say they did all they could to keep the IPCC out of it.
Don't get me wrong - I have great respect for what the police do & the way they usually go about it [I'm off to a Sergeants birthday party tomorrow] but when it looks like they have made an error you never get a volunteered full & frank explanation, you only get what they believe is already in the public domain & this is then updated as & when other info becomes common knowledge - they are always very economical with the truth.
If it takes people jumping to conclusions & refusing to accept explanations & statements that smell fishy in order to force the truth out - I'll live with that.
Time for a friday beer
concerns me how everyone hears a story from one perspective and they are so anti-police.
Well that makes a change. Usually the media are very anti-protesters and very pro-police.
Something must have happened at the G20 protest 🙄
.
Oh yeah I know ........... cameras and video recording equipment has suddenly become very available and very portable. Things will never be the same again .......
I doesn't give me much hope for serving my force and trying to give the public the best service they desire and deserve when people are so anti.
In fairness, I think that is an issue for the police to address, not the public. People are reacting to some very disturbing images and I think the first step towards improving the police image would be to acknowledge the wrong doing, not try to justify it.
Well that makes a change. Usually the media are very anti-protesters and very pro-police.
Agree. Although, Charlie Brooker made an observation on Newswipe last night that, the cause for all the demonstrations and indeed the real news story, the G20 summit, has been lost amongst a flurry of violent images, with the finger pointed at all concerned. Very clever news manipulation that quite frankly, we've all suckered for.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/16/police-delete-tourist-photos
you gotta love the stazi-sorry Met
What, you expect ordinary coppers to publicly denounce statements issued by their senior officers.
No that's what their Federation is for, unfortunately the Police Federation sides with management to protect their members which is very short sighted. A focused union would ensure their members interests came before those of the Police Service and would denounce those senior ranks that habitually lie or leak information to the press.
I couldn't agree more Sandwich. However, the fact that coppers aren't legally allowed to join a trade union is hardly their fault !
Again, direct your anger at the politicians NOT the police.
Blame the politicians or the police?
I am a 42 year old male. I am from the north (Sheffield) originally and went to college in Newcastle but now live and work in London. I am a skilled manual worker and dress accordingly. I have been stopped by the police three times in the twenty years I have lived here.
One of my closest friends is also a 42 year old male from the north (Manchester) who went to university in Newcastle. He now works in academia for museums and galleries and dresses much smarter than me at all times. In the twenty years he has lived and worked in London he gets stopped by the police about once every three maybe four weeks. I know because I live nearest to him so he always comes to see me after to just find rationality and peace of mind.
On Tuesday he was walked out of WH Smiths in Waterloo by a group of transport police in front of a rush hour crowd. His crime was to have gone in with an orange bag. I'm being serious, they told him 90% of crime in Waterloo was commited by people with orange bags.
He had just bought a yogurt drink in Sainsburys across the road. They accused him of stealing a bottle of water before they looked in his orange bag.
Are the politicians to blame for this incident that delayed him from getting to work by 40 minutes as well as embarassing him and seemingly showing the general public who can't be trusted.
Yes, there is one major diference between my friend and I.
Otherwise he is from a better family and looks much more respectable than I do.
Every three weeks I have to help him return to normal.
I do not blame the politicians.
I do know that the police are giving certan sections of society an attitude of
'give a dog a bad name and he'll live up to it.'
I blame the police. All of them. Especially you Munqe-chick, unless you do something personally to stop this sort of action. The rate my friend is stopped hasn't changed since the Stephen Lawrence incedence.
As for the G20, I have attended a few marches in London. On the one time I saw 'incitement of the mob', as it were, it was being done by someone who was obviously a plainclothes policeman.
The actions of the police at the G20 were premeditated.
I can't find the pictures of the guy hacking at the building but I remember thinking it looked like he was wearing a police issue balaclava. Perhaps it was you Munqe-chick.
pullfaces I go to work everyday on a building site. My work might be to a good and acceptable standard. Or it might not. But if 6 months after the building is completed what I have constructed falls apart because of poor workmanship, then the client will hold the building contractors and it's management responsible. He or she will not hold me responsible.
If a police officer behaves in an unacceptable manner, then certainly he or she should be held accountable/responsible for their actions. If this is however a problem which endemic throughout the force as some seem to be suggesting is the case, then senior officers also need to be held accountable. And of course ultimately the politicians also need to be held accountable, as this is where finally responsibility lies.
As the 'client' I feel that is the [i]politicians[/i] which have a 'contractual' obligation to me to ensure that our society is properly policed.
If we have reached a stage where individual officers are a law unto themselves and operate quite freely from their superiors and democratic control (as expressed by the will of parliament) then it is the senior officers and the politicians who are responsible for this situation.
Sacking an incompetent workman might well be the correct course of action to take, but a client is hardly going to be very impressed if they are simply informed, "don't worry it's all sorted, we've sacked the guy responsible", as that would clearly be of little concern to them.
What worries me about the Ian Tomlinson case is that whilst the thug who attacked him might well be sacked, those who created, and are responsible for the situation which allowed the thug to freely operate, will get away with it Scot free. I would like senior officers and politicians, including the chairman of the Metropolitan Police Authority and the Home Secretary, to also be held accountable.
I'm also concerned that individual police officers might be used as scapegoats for the failures of senior officers and politicians, and that there is a general vilification of all coppers, as appears to be happening to some degree on here. Why the need to single out Munqe-chick ? As far as I know she's a long way from the Met. Is it just because of straight forward prejudice ? Prejudice - what so many people accuse the police of being.
Grizzlygus, crikey with you both. Makes me angry people jump to conclusions from what the media portray which IS NOT the full facts. We as the public never know the full facts. Being a copper I can also see the difficulty for the police policing that protest, what a nightmare it must've been. I undergo the training to be able to police those demonstrations, get petrol bombed, fight with ridiculous amounts of kit on, run around with a shield .. would like to see some of you try it when you feel outnumbered and see what your reactions are anyway I'm not going to pass judgement or opinion on the G20 as I can see both sides and from my policing I certainly know the media are not potraying it in it's full light. he police cannot comment on procedure/tactics to allay any fears.Do not judge all police from one incident that has not even come to a full investigation/conclusion.
Except that it's not just one incident. There is this case, the woman who was assaulted, and (which doesn't seem to have been picked up by mainstream media that I've seen) [url= http://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993 ]this[/url] video - plus numerous witness statements. I'm not suggesting that 'all police are thugs' - but I am suggesting that significant numbers of police almost certainly acted in an overly aggressive, unacceptable manner. It also seems fairly clear that the Met has repeatedly lied about what happened.
Closing ranks and 'sticking up for your own' no matter what they've done still seems to be a pretty prevalent attitude in the police force, judging by the response of serving officers on here.
I am not blaming the media at all, what I'm saying is everyone is making their opinions and decisions based on the media, which as everyone know is never the FULL picture.The IPCC would ALWAYS have become involved. No matter what may occur whenever there is a death either in Custody or within 24 hours of being "invovled"/meeting with police there will ALWAYS be an IPCC investigation. If I spoke to Joe Bloggs in the street and conducted a drugs search then 8 hours later he died of a heart attack, the IPCC would conduct an investigation due to police involvement, so IPCC involvement has nothing to do with media furore over his death.
Except that the initial IPCC response was 'nothing to see here' - until the video came out.
it just concerns me how everyone hears a story from one perspective and they are so anti-police.
Maybe part of the reason some people are 'anti-police' is the way you seem to try and justify unacceptable behaviour and automatically side with your colleagues no matter what.
All I'm now saying is I don' work in the Met. I'm not going to make any more comment on his thread as it may lose me my job. I'm off not to return here.
PS: Oh and Grumm I have made no comments on here about my views of what happened at G20 so you cannot suggest I have "sided with my colleagues".
Not exactly, although you did say, in response to this post in the thread about Ian Tomlinson's death:
Say what you will, I don't like the G20 protests or the protesters for that matter. Police get too much crap for what is a VERY tough job
They will be easily identifiable by their shoulder numbers.
2 hottie ... agree, good on you.
So do police get too much crap for beating people and lying about it? It's a tough job and we wouldn't understand so they should just be allowed to get on with it eh?
Or maybe you were agreeing that you don't like the G20 protests or protestors? I wonder if any other police feel the same and whether this might have clouded their judgement?
I agreed with what 2hottie said but I have never given my own opinion on any of the matters discussed here and I would not like to either as I wasn't there.
Having just re-read the other post I didn't make myself clear. I didn't agree with everything 2 hottie said but it's too late now it has come across as wrong and written in a hurry! oh well never mind mistake made.